If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

The Central Intelligence Agency can selectively disclose classified information to reporters while withholding that very same information from a requester under the Freedom of Information Act, a federal court ruled last month.

The ruling came in a FOIA lawsuit brought by reporter Adam Johnson who sought a copy of emails sent to reporters Siobhan Gorman of the Wall Street Journal, David Ignatius of the Washington Post, and Scott Shane of the New York Times that the CIA said were classified and exempt from disclosure.

“The Director of Central Intelligence is free to disclose classified information about CIA sources and methods selectively, if he concludes that it is necessary to do so in order to protect those intelligence sources and methods, and no court can second guess his decision,” wrote Chief Judge Colleen J. McMahon of the Southern District of New York in a decision in favor of the CIA that was released last week with minor redactions.

Saw this story.
Takes me back to when Snowden leaked the news, and the public uproar that followed.
Guess that massive dissent fell on deaf ears.
If the tool is too useful to let go just legislate a few loopholes, and continue on regardless of public opinion.
When did US intelligence agencies begin dictating to subjects, rather than serving us voting US citizens?

Hands Off My Metadata!

The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but
progress. -- Joseph JoubertAttachment 1008

SAN FRANCISCO -- You probably know where your Social Security card, birth certificate and other sensitive information is being stored, but what about your genetic material? If you or your child was born in California after 1983, your DNA is likely being stored by the government, may be available to law enforcement and may even be in the hands of outside researchers, CBS San Francisco's Julie Watts reports.

Some small progress in the Net Neutrality fight. Bill passes the senate, but getting the bill past the House is another story.
Senate passes measure repealing changes to net neutrality rules
By Ted Barrett and Daniella Diaz

The Senate voted Wednesday to pass a measure that would repeal changes to net neutrality rules that were recently adopted by the Republican-controlled Federal Communications Commission.
The measure, which was backed by all 49 Democrats and Republican Sens. Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and John Kennedy of Louisiana, will be sent to the GOP-led House, where it'll likely go nowhere -- and President Donald Trump is unlikely to back it.
While Collins' support had been public leading up to the vote, Murkowski's and Kennedy's "yes" votes came as a surprise to some.

After the vote, Murkowski described herself as "frustrated" by the politics of the net neutrality debate that she says hurts her large and rural state, which has unique internet needs.
"I voted to hopefully get beyond the politics on this, which is the seesaw back and forth between Republican FCC and a Democratic FCC that doesn't lend any level of certainty to the process," she told reporters.
She continued: "I'm frustrated where we are today. We've basically moved forward a measure that isn't going to become law because this President isn't going to sign it. And so we send yet another political message. When are we going to get down to the actual legislation that both sides profess we need to have?"
Democrats used the Congressional Review Act to force a vote -- a law that allows Congress to repeal agency rules and regulations on a simple majority vote, instead of a 60-vote threshold needed to break procedural hurdles on most legislation, the kinds of traditional roadblocks where Senate leadership could typically hold up such a proposal.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer spoke after the vote to begin debate earlier Wednesday, arguing that "at stake is the future of the internet."
"That fundamental equality of access is what has made the internet so dynamic," he said on the Senate floor. "Net neutrality protected everyone ... that era, the era of an open Internet, will unfortunately soon come to an end."
He continued: "The Democratic position is very simple. Let's treat the internet like the public good that it is."Story Continues

The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but
progress. -- Joseph JoubertAttachment 1008

Some small progress in the Net Neutrality fight. Bill passes the senate, but getting the bill past the House is another story.
Senate passes measure repealing changes to net neutrality rules
By Ted Barrett and Daniella Diaz

The Senate voted Wednesday to pass a measure that would repeal changes to net neutrality rules that were recently adopted by the Republican-controlled Federal Communications Commission.
The measure, which was backed by all 49 Democrats and Republican Sens. Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and John Kennedy of Louisiana, will be sent to the GOP-led House, where it'll likely go nowhere -- and President Donald Trump is unlikely to back it.
While Collins' support had been public leading up to the vote, Murkowski's and Kennedy's "yes" votes came as a surprise to some.

After the vote, Murkowski described herself as "frustrated" by the politics of the net neutrality debate that she says hurts her large and rural state, which has unique internet needs.
"I voted to hopefully get beyond the politics on this, which is the seesaw back and forth between Republican FCC and a Democratic FCC that doesn't lend any level of certainty to the process," she told reporters.
She continued: "I'm frustrated where we are today. We've basically moved forward a measure that isn't going to become law because this President isn't going to sign it. And so we send yet another political message. When are we going to get down to the actual legislation that both sides profess we need to have?"
Democrats used the Congressional Review Act to force a vote -- a law that allows Congress to repeal agency rules and regulations on a simple majority vote, instead of a 60-vote threshold needed to break procedural hurdles on most legislation, the kinds of traditional roadblocks where Senate leadership could typically hold up such a proposal.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer spoke after the vote to begin debate earlier Wednesday, arguing that "at stake is the future of the internet."
"That fundamental equality of access is what has made the internet so dynamic," he said on the Senate floor. "Net neutrality protected everyone ... that era, the era of an open Internet, will unfortunately soon come to an end."
He continued: "The Democratic position is very simple. Let's treat the internet like the public good that it is."Story Continues

I'll have to agree that forcing a vote on Net Neutrality was the right thing to do.

It puts politicians on record as to where each one stands on the issue.

A few days ago, I again posted about Implanted RFID BioChips. Now this regarding Digital Driver's Licenses. Both Implanted RFID BioChips and Digital Driver's Licenses continue making it into Mainstream Media as the next best thing. So, here we are again. I want to present an example of how the two could be intertwined.

There's an app for almost everything these days, whether it's shopping, tracking your eating or exercise or finding your way. Now driver's licenses are making the transition from a card carried in a pocket or purse to a digital application on your mobile phone.

Colorado, Delaware, Idaho, Maryland, Wyoming and the District of Columbia are carrying out limited trials of digital driver's licenses. Iowa and Louisiana are planning to issue digital licenses to every motorist who wants one beginning this year.

"People are excited about it," said Rob Mikell, an executive with Idemia, a Billerica, Massachusetts-based software firm that has developed a digital driver's license for Iowa and is running a pilot program for digital licenses in Delaware.

It is possible for RFID Chip Implants embedded into the hand to work in conjunction with an APP on a smart. A Digital ID APP, in conjunction with an RFID BioChip would allow for GPS tracking. Even without a smart phone, anyone implanted with an RFID BioChip could have their identity monitored, logged and stored when entering a business or government building, or anywhere... Think of those metal detectors that we walk through when entering a Mall, store, school, airport and so-on. Those metal detectors could be upgraded to include RFID scanners.

Video clip from last year regarding BioChip Implants.

Clip of Trump and GOP pushing Bio-Metric Tracking System.
January 2017, Trump signed an Executive Order to expedite a Bio-Metric Tracking System.

This is repetitive, yet it needs to be said.

It starts as voluntary
Then becomes a condition of employment
Followed by boycotting people without it (making it difficult to buy or sell)
Finally, in the name of public safety it become law.

We need legislation passed that prohibits businesses and government agencies from boycotting anyone that refuses a microchip, electronic tattoo, or something akin to it.